Customer Reviews

Ethics of Liberty

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Murray Newton Rothbard's classic hard-hitting defense of property-rights-based libertarianism is deservedly back in print, with a valuable new introduction by Hans-Hermann Hoppe that alone is worth the price of the book even for those who already own the original. Prof. Hoppe helpfully locates Rothbard in libertarian scholarly tradition, explains why Rothbard's work was unjustly ignored while unsystematic but "tolerant" thinkers like Robert Nozick were unfairly elevated, refutes the major criticisms that have been offered of Rothbard's work since the original publication of _The Ethics of Liberty_, and effectively argues that for natural-law theorist Rothbard, libertarianism was not "libertinism" but socially quite conservative. Also helpful is the new format, in which the book's former end-notes are arranged in footnote style rather than collected at the end of each chapter.

Just about everything has been said about this book, so I'll simply answer some criticisms.

"let us imagine a murder victim who has no heir or whose legacy is repudiated. Is his death to go unpunished? And what if the heir is the murderer? I'm sure that Rothbard had a answer for that, but it is not in this book."

Well, Rothbard is no omniscient, nor is anyone else; furthermore, he can't answer every possible question in one book. In reality, no-one knows exactly how the free market would provide various services in the absence of any form of a State, but Rothbard makes likely predictions. In the case that a victim has no heirs, it is presumed that anyone who was close to the victim would be able to demand justice in a private court, on his behalf. Furthermore, the victim's insurance policy against crime might mandate that, should he be murdered, the murderer be found; his lawyer would be responsible for making sure that happens after his death. Finally, all crimes must occur in place. Rothbard says that various streets and buildings would have private police, employed by the owners. It would be in the owners best interest to see that crimes committed on his or her property go punished, so as to discourage that.

Furthermore, another reviewer has remarked that it is possible to have a government of minimal function that does not inflate the money supply. This displays extreme ignorance of history, and naivete. That's exactly what our founding father's tried to do: and it was a failure from the start. The past 300 years have shown us that any government at all, no matter how small it starts, no matter the "constitutional restrictions", will grow and grow and grow until all liberty is crushed under the boot of tyranny. The very existence of a government, in and of itself, mandates that the non-aggression axiom be violated. For a government cannot possibly exist without taxes, and taxes are the initiation of aggression. What are taxes, but forcing indivudals to work 10-37.5% of the year for no compensation? And what is that, but slavery? Systematic, persistent, and regularized theft is slavery. Thus, it is impossible to adhere to libertarian principles and support any State.

Murray Rothbard was the leading libertarian thinker of the 20th century. In 1982, he published THE ETHICS OF LIBERTY, his central work on political theory and ethics. This work was republished recently with an excellent introduction by Hans-Hermann Hope (the endnotes have been converted into footnotes, a big improvement).

This work is probably the best discussion of libertarian philosophy from an anarcho-capitalist perspective. In addition, Rothbard develops a theory based on natural law, thus distancing himself from other strands of libertarian thought.

The book is particularly comprehensive. Starting with a discussion of natural law, Rothbard turns to practical issues such as voluntary exchange, contracts, and the rights of children. He then discusses the concept of the state. He ends the work with discussions of different approaches to rights and a strategy for advancing liberty. The comprehensive nature of the work is also its greatest weakness. Rothbard discusses too many subjects in too few pages. For example, the difficult question of the rights of children takes all of 15 pages. Yet there is no more difficult question for any theory of rights than that question.

Rothbard's discussion of the rights of children is emblematic of the weakness and at times superficial nature of this work. Take Rothbard's discussion of when the parents' "jurisdiction" over a child ends. He states: "Surely, any particular age (21, 18, or whatever) can only be completely arbitrary. The clue to the solution to this thorny question lies in the parental property rights in their home. For the child has his FULL rights of self-ownership WHEN HE DEMONSTRATES THAT HE HAS THEM IN NATURE-in short when he leaves or `runs away' from home." [p. 103; emphasis in the original.] First of all, it may be arbitrary to establish the age of emancipation at 18 rather than 17, but such decisions are found in all areas of life and are not thereby rendered "completely arbitrary." In any event, is it "completely arbitrary" to set it at 18 rather than 5? Moreover, Rothbard's "solution" is in most respects even more arbitrary. For example, if Junior Jones runs away when he is 8 years old, does that mean his parents cannot force him to stay? What if Junior is 5 and wanders off his parents' property and stays at the Smiths' house, asserting that he would prefer to live with the Smiths. Has he then demonstrated a "right to self-ownership" in nature? Would it be wrong for the Joneses to take him back? Rothbard uses a similar argument against Laissez-faire advocates of limited government who believe the state may provided limited protection services. Supposedly their views fail because how much or little services such a government might provide can only be "purely arbitrary." [p. 181.] This type of argument leads Rothbard to advocate abortion-on-demand, a position with which I strongly disagree.

For whatever flaws it contains, THE ETHICS OF LIBERTY it is certainly one of the most provocative books you will ever read.

I had the unique pleasure to be one of the typesetters on the 1998 edition of this book, and I must say that it was a POWERFUL book. Rothbard builds his entire world-view from some basic arguments, creating a step-by-step explanation for his positions. His initial exposition seems straight-forward, but when he starts applying his views to modern ethical questions, the weak of mind should exit. I found myself disagreeing with his positions, and then realizing that I could not disagree with his positions without disagreeing with his previous fundamental arguments--which I had already accepted. Rothbard's logic is powerful, and he is a master at its use. Anyone looking for an easy bed-time read is discouraged from this book. Anyone looking for a serious intellectual challenge--with the testicular fortitude to stand up to a world-class intellectual onslaught--may find this book to be a life-changer.

The Rothbardian brand of libertarianism can be somewhat extreme, but if anyone could explain and sell every page of it well--it would be Murray Rothbard. Anyone interested in really breaking down libertarian philosophy, this is an excellent starting point. I do no recommend this book for people who aren't familiar with the philosophy though, this book can be a bit heavy and somewhat confusing for someone who doesn't have a good foundation of knowledge to work with.

Eventually though, and at one point or another--this books is a must read.

This is my choice for the best introduction to libertarianism for the serious student of political economy. Randy Barnett's _The Structure of Liberty_ and Frederic Bastiat's _The Law_ are excellent as well, but second to _The Ethics of Liberty_.

Rothbard builds the structure of liberty one brick at a time. After laying the foundation, he then applies the basics to deconstructing the state. He proceeds further with trenchant critiques of utilitarianism, Mises, Hayek, Berlin, and Nozick. (As an added gem, in the Nozick chapter Rothbard presents a compelling case for a free-market justice system.)

I highly recommend this book for those who wish a profound understanding of libertarianism from one of its foremost proponents.

Michael R. Edelstein, Ph.D.
Author of _Three Minute Therapy_

This is a very powerful work to say the least. Rothbard pushes natural rights and the non-initiation of force arguments to the full extreme. Despite this, I still disagree with him on one major point; the necessity of government. Although the idea has only been lightly touched upon by theorists, government is possible without any initiation of force against the governed. In fact, it is this ideal government that is the only alternative to both anarchy and statism. Nevertheless, Rothbard keeps you on your toes at all times. It is impossible to challenge anarcho-capitalism without an indepth understanding of this book. Ultimately, the premises of this book are virtually irrefutable, it is only the conclusions that one may dispute.

Murray Rothbards call for a just property rights basis for justice will spin your head if you accept the premises on which it is based. A rational alternative to the morality based justice we suffer with today, this book is a call to arms and an appeal to common sense in the fine tradition of Thomas Paine.

Rothbard argues like a great trial lawyer. I was reminded of Bugliosi's book on the OJ trial more than any of the philosophical books on ethics I have read. I much prefer the clarity of Rothbard's writing to the rambling and gratuitous use of logical argot in Nozick. At the same time, I think Libertarianism needs a better approach to ethics to counteract the work of scholars like Rawls, who,following Kant's Metaphysics Of Morals, argues pursuasively for a more collectivist view. Fortunately or unfortunately, I think Ayn Rand was closer to the the mark with her ethics as expressed in Atlas Shrugged and Capitalism the Unknown Ideal. It is sad that more critical approaches to objectivist ethics have not been attempted by non-devotees. Still, the discussion of property rights as fundamental is priceless, and should be required reading for congressional staffers.

Most works dealing with the subject of Liberty tend to base arguments on historical data. Rothbard goes back to the beginning and builds a firm foundation of elementry concepts, then operates on these elements with relentless logic. The results will sometimes make you grit your teeth, take a couple of aspirin, and question your cherished beliefs. It is NOT light reading, more like a textbook, but one of the finest works I have ever read